Proposed and Past Experiments Detecting Absolute Motion
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Way off topic: oil and politics (was: Hexagonal grid and its three directions)
Next: WHATS NEW Robert L. Park Friday, May 28, 2010 Washington,DC
From: kenseto on 29 May 2010 09:29 Proposed and Past Experiments Detecting Absolute Motion: The following link descibes a new doable experiment to detect absolute motion. Also included are new interpretions for the results of past experiments caused by absolute motion: The Photoelectric Experiment and the Double-Slit Experiment. http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008experiment.pdf Ken Seto
From: Sam Wormley on 29 May 2010 10:33 On 5/29/10 8:29 AM, kenseto wrote: > Proposed and Past Experiments Detecting Absolute Motion: > The following link descibes a new doable experiment to detect absolute > motion. Also included are new interpretions for the results of past > experiments caused by absolute motion: The Photoelectric Experiment > and the Double-Slit Experiment. > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008experiment.pdf > > Ken Seto Hidden is the law of inertia is that fact the whether an object is in motion or not depends strictly on the point of view of the observer. Affirmed in Newton's laws of motion. Certainly in agreement with the null results of Michelson-Morley experiment and subsequent experiments. http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html The simple response to Seto's posting is that Seto FAILS to understand that linear motion is relative. Always has been and always will be.
From: PD on 29 May 2010 11:52 On May 29, 8:29 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > Proposed and Past Experiments Detecting Absolute Motion: > The following link descibes a new doable experiment to detect absolute > motion. Also included are new interpretions for the results of past > experiments caused by absolute motion: The Photoelectric Experiment > and the Double-Slit Experiment.http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008experiment.pdf > > Ken Seto The experimental proposal is completely inadequate. The author of the proposal has clearly no sense for experimental methodology, has not evaluated the precision of his apparatus or the precision required for the measurement. He has not referenced other recent experimental results in the literature, to demonstrate that his apparatus will provide a result that is significantly better in precision than the results from complementary experiments or demonstrate that this quantity has not been previously measured. The author of the proposal has no demonstrated competence in designing, constructing, operating, or analyzing the results of any experiment. Until these issues are resolved, the proposal is non-viable and will likely be round-filed by any referee. PD
From: eric gisse on 29 May 2010 14:56 kenseto wrote: > Proposed and Past Experiments Detecting Absolute Motion: > The following link descibes a new doable experiment to detect absolute > motion. Also included are new interpretions for the results of past > experiments caused by absolute motion: The Photoelectric Experiment > and the Double-Slit Experiment. > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008experiment.pdf > > Ken Seto Really, Ken? The photoelectric effect and the double slit experiment detect absolute motion?
From: eon on 29 May 2010 15:14
On May 29, 3:29 pm, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > Proposed and Past Experiments Detecting Absolute Motion: absolute motion with respect to what? you must have something which is fixed fixed wrt what ?? |